In young bodybuilding practitioners, native whey, filtered directly from milk, raised blood leucine 40% higher, by area under the curve, than standard whey derived from cheese. Over the following five hours, muscle protein synthesis showed no significant difference between the two powders.
This guide compiles studies identified via PubMed: manufacturing and composition, then leucine, muscle synthesis, recovery, mass and strength, in both young and senior populations, before the levers that matter most: digestion and label reading.
Manufacturing : native whey is separated from skimmed milk by microfiltration, before any cheese production; standard whey comes from whey recovered after curdling. Sweet whey, from rennet curdling, contains glycomacropeptide, a casein fragment poor in leucine that represents 20 to 25% of its proteins. Native whey therefore contains approximately 15% more leucine.
Results : this surplus is visible in the blood, not in the muscles. Against standard whey, native did not increase muscle protein synthesis further over 5 hours, in young as well as over 70-year-olds, and it produced gains in mass and strength comparable to those of milk, with no significant difference, over 11 to 12 weeks. What matters most remains total intake, around 1.6 g of protein per kilogram per day, in servings of 20 to 40 g.
- Two sources for the same milk proteins
- Concentrate, isolate, hydrolysate: the degree of purification
- What the process really changes in the powder
- Blood leucine: a higher peak with native
- Muscle synthesis: no clear advantage
- After several weeks: mass and strength
- Recovery: signals to read with caution
- What matters most: total intake, dose per serving, leucine
- Building muscle: what adds to proteins
- Digestion and lactose: isolate or concentrate
- Common misconceptions and comparative table
- Reading a label and using your whey properly
- Frequently Asked Questions
Two sources for the same milk proteins
Cow's milk contains two families of proteins: the caseins, approximately 80% of the total, and whey proteins, approximately 20%, the whey. Native whey and classic whey therefore do not differ in the nature of the proteins, but in the path followed to isolate them.
Classic whey is born in the cheese factory. The chymosin from rennet cuts one of the caseins: the caseins form the curd, and the remaining liquid, sweet whey, carries the soluble proteins as well as a fragment of casein released by this cut, the glycomacropeptide. Curdling by acidification (Greek yogurt, acid-curd cheeses) produces acidic whey. Concentrated then dried, whey becomes a whey that the authors of Norwegian trials describe as a cheese by-product, heated and chemically treated.
Native whey follows another path: skim milk passes through microfiltration membranes that retain casein micelles and allow soluble proteins to pass through, which have never encountered rennet. A review co-signed by representatives of the dairy industry describes this production from skim milk.
In studies, native refers to whey proteins extracted from milk without going through the cheese factory. The term says nothing about the protein content: native whey can be a concentrate or an isolate.
Concentrate, isolate, hydrolysate: the degree of purification
Native or classic, a whey can then be more or less purified. The concentrate most common in supplements, called WPC-80, contains approximately 80% protein, the remainder including notably lactose, milk sugar. Theisolate takes purification further. Two families of processes lead to it: filtration membranes, which sort molecules by size, and ion exchange, which binds proteins to a charged resin then releases them together.
For milk protein concentrates, from 42 to 85% protein, a 2015 review signed by the dairy industry shows that the lactose content decreases as the protein content increases.
Thehydrolysate is a whey pre-cut by enzymes. In a small trial, with 6 young men per group, a whey hydrolysate increased muscle protein synthesis after exercise by approximately 122% more than casein and 31% more than soy.
Our 100% Whey Isolate is a whey protein isolate manufactured in France and obtained by filtration; 30 g provides 22.9 g of protein and 2.0 g of fat. Its fact sheet does not specify whether the starting whey is native or derived from cheese-making: we therefore present it as neither one nor the other. Our article plant or animal proteins compares milk to plant-based sources.
What the process really changes in the powder
Glycomacropeptide. This is the best documented difference. Formed by chymosin during cheese manufacturing, this casein fragment represents 20 to 25% of proteins in sweet whey products. It is naturally low in histidine, leucine, methionine, tyrosine and tryptophan, which must be added to it when it serves as the basis for protein substitutes for phenylketonuria, a rare metabolic disorder. Native whey, extracted before any rennet action, contains none.
Leucine. As a result: according to the Norwegian team that authored most of the trials, native whey contains approximately 15% more leucine than standard whey and 25% more than milk. Per serving, native provided 2.7 g of leucine versus 2.2 g for 20 g of protein in a 2017 trial (+23%), 2.06 g versus 1.71 g for approximately 15.6 g in the electrostimulation trial (+20%), and 0.6 g more in seniors.
Fats and taste. Native whey and standard whey concentrates at 80% were compared: native contained less fat and produced a clear solution, standard contained more lipid oxidation products. However, beverages based on native were less appreciated than those of three of the four standard whey products tested.
Denaturation. Native is presented as undenatured. In the laboratory, a whey isolate denatured 91% by heat lost its structure faster than a 91% native isolate, but released amino acids and absorbable small peptides at the same rate; in piglets, blood amino acid peaks were comparable. This study, co-signed by a pediatric nutrition group, compared degrees of denaturation, not whey derived from milk or cheese: denaturation changes the structure without notably modifying what the protein provides once digested.
Animal data. In rats, 8 weeks of a beverage providing 1.56 g of protein per kilogram produced more muscle mass and grip strength with native whey than with commercial whey. No human trial has compared these two whey types on muscle mass in strength training; in the electrostimulation trial, muscle cross-section increased without difference between native and standard.
| Characteristic | Native Whey | Standard Whey |
|---|---|---|
| Glycomacropeptide | Absent | 20 to 25% of sweet whey proteins |
| Leucine | Approximately 15% more according to authors; in trials, 0.35 to 0.6 g more per 15 to 20 g serving | Reference |
| Fats | Less, at equal protein levels | More, with greater oxidation products |
| Denaturation | Presented as undenatured | Exposed to heat during manufacturing; in the laboratory, a heat-denatured isolate released its amino acids at the same rate as a non-denatured isolate |
Blood leucine: higher peak with native
Among essential amino acids, leucine is the one that most strongly triggers muscle protein synthesis. According to the leucine threshold hypothesis, a rapid and high rise in blood levels would be necessary to maximally stimulate this synthesis: native whey therefore seemed likely to perform better.
In 22 young trained men and women in strength training (24 enrolled), two servings of 20 g of protein, immediately after an intense leg session and then 2 hours later, compared native whey, a standard concentrated whey and milk. Native raised blood leucine higher than the other two after each serving: its area under the curve exceeded that of standard whey by 40% and that of milk by 240%.
Hamarsland H, Nordengen AL, Nyvik Aas S, et al. J Int Soc Sports Nutr 2017;14:43. DOI : 10.1186/s12970-017-0202-y
In 21 people aged 70 and over, with two doses of 20 g, native whey also increased blood leucine more than standard whey, and both wheys more than milk; it also surpassed milk in the 11 and 12-week trials.
In young men, after 25 g of native whey, casein, or a mixture of both, the peak of essential amino acids from the mixture was close to that of native whey and higher than that of casein. This trial did not compare native whey to standard whey.
Blood leucine, measured over a few hours, provides information about protein digestion and composition, not muscle gained. For that, you need to look at mass and strength after several weeks.
Muscle protein synthesis: no clear advantage
In the 2017 trial in young practitioners, muscle protein synthesis, measured by biopsies and tracer, increased with both wheys. Over the entire 5 hours following the session, it showed no difference between native and standard whey. It was, however, higher with native than with milk: 0.112% per hour versus 0.064%. Only caveat: from 3 to 5 hours, only native remained above the baseline level, with no significant difference between the two.
In 21 people aged 70 and over, 20 g of native whey, standard concentrated whey, or milk, taken immediately after a leg session and then 2 hours later: despite higher blood leucine, native whey did not increase muscle protein synthesis or anabolic signaling more than standard whey. It only surpassed milk from 1 to 3 hours after exercise and over the full 5 hours. Native whey provided only 0.6 g more leucine per dose.
Hamarsland H, Aas SN, Nordengen AL, et al. J Nutr Health Aging 2019;23(1):42-50. DOI : 10.1007/s12603-018-1105-6
In young practitioners, the authors of the 2017 trial estimate that 20 g of whey was probably already sufficient to stimulate synthesis to maximum, and clarify that higher synthesis compared to milk does not imply better adaptation over time. In seniors, they consider this saturation unlikely and conclude that a difference of 0.6 g of leucine per dose is too small to change muscle protein synthesis.
A network meta-analysis from 2026 (51 studies of muscle protein synthesis after exercise) ranks native whey at the top of estimated efficacy, but based on a single study arm : its effect does not reach significance, and only non-native whey, represented by 37 study arms, shows a statistically significant effect. The authors call for caution: synthesis measured over a few hours does not necessarily predict muscle gain.
In 23 young beginner men, muscle protein synthesis measured after the first session was not correlated with thigh volume gain, averaging 7.9% after 16 weeks.
After several weeks: mass and strength
Two randomized double-blind trials measured muscle and strength gained over several months. They compare native whey to milk, not to standard whey: the only multi-week trial against dairy whey found in PubMed involves electrical muscle stimulation (following section). In these Norwegian trials, powders were manufactured or supplied by dairy manufacturers; the authors are academics.
In 40 untrained young adults around 29 years old, 12 weeks of resistance training, 3 sessions per week, with two daily doses of 20 g of protein in the form of milk or native whey. Each dose provided 1.9 g of leucine with milk and 2.5 g with native whey. All measurements of muscle mass and strength increased by 5 to 16%, with no significant difference between the two groups, and no correlation between anabolic signaling measured after a session and gains obtained. The authors note that participants' high protein intake, approximately 2 g per kilogram per day, may have masked a difference.
Hamarsland H, Handegard V, Kåshagen M, et al. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2019;51(1):75-83. DOI : 10.1249/MSS.0000000000001758
In seniors, the trial also shows no significant difference. In 30 people aged 70 and over who completed an 11-week trial, two daily doses of 20 g accompanied a full-body training program. Lean mass increased by 6.3% with milk and 4.6% with native whey, leg press strength by 29.1% and 36.0%: none of these differences were significant. The researchers had nonetheless expected an advantage for native whey in these seniors.
A 2026 analysis grouping these two trials summarizes: leg lean mass increased by approximately 1 kg and leg press strength by approximately 31%, in both young people and seniors.
| Trial | Population and protocol | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Hamarsland, 2017 | 22 trained young adults (24 enrolled), 2 doses of 20 g after a session | Higher leucine with native whey; muscle protein synthesis with no significant difference compared to standard whey |
| Hamarsland, 2019, young | 40 untrained young men, 12 weeks, 2 servings of 20 g per day | Mass and strength increased by 5 to 16%, with no significant difference compared to milk |
| Hamarsland, 2019, seniors | 30 people aged 70 and over, 11 weeks, 2 servings of 20 g per day | Lean mass +4.6% versus +6.3% with milk, difference not significant |
Recovery: signals to interpret with caution
In Norwegian trials, recovery of strength within 24 hours following a session did not differ between tested proteins. Two French trials explored other contexts.
In 42 moderately active young men, 12 weeks of thigh electrostimulation followed by jumps, with 15 g of carbohydrates and 15 g of native whey, 15 g of standard whey or 30 g of carbohydrates, 5 days per week. Maximum strength increased by 11.8% in the native group and 7.1% in the standard group, increases measured in each group, with no progress with placebo; between groups, only power and voluntary muscle activation differed significantly. Power began to recover as early as 30 minutes after a session with native whey, versus 24 hours with standard whey. Muscle cross-section increased with no difference between groups.
Garcia-Vicencio S, Ratel S, Gryson C, et al. Front Physiol 2018;9:1312. DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2018.01312
The only trial in our selection comparing native to dairy whey over 12 weeks, it has its limitations: groups of 10 to 17 participants, training by electrostimulation far removed from weight training, and funding by a dairy manufacturer producing native whey, six of whose employees are co-authors.
The second followed 12 trained rugby players over three simulated tournaments, with placebo, 80 g of carbohydrates, or 20 g of native whey and 60 g of carbohydrates after each match. Both carbohydrate drinks maintained 50-meter sprint performance versus placebo, and the drink with native whey limited the increase in creatine kinase, a marker of muscle damage. Without a standard whey arm, the trial says nothing about an advantage specific to native whey; several co-authors worked for a dairy manufacturer.
Industrial funding does not invalidate a trial, but invites verification of group size, chosen comparison, and independent replication. The most robust trials show no advantage of native whey over mass or strength.
What matters most: total intake, dose per serving, leucine
Total daily intake. A meta-analysis of 49 trials and 1,863 participants shows that protein supplements, combined with weight training for at least 6 weeks, add an average of 0.30 kg of lean mass and 2.49 kg of maximum strength. Beyond a total intake of approximately 1.6 g of protein per kilogram per day, lean mass gains plateaued. A sports nutrition scientific society recommends 1.4 to 2.0 g per kilogram per day for most athletes.
Dose per serving. In 48 trained young men weighing approximately 80 kg, after a leg session, 20 g of whey isolate increased muscle synthesis by 49% and 40 g by 56%: according to the authors, 20 g was sufficient, the higher dose mainly increasing amino acid oxidation; with egg proteins, in 6 young men, the maximum was also around 20 g. After a full-body session, 40 g performed better than 20 g in 30 trained men, and in 2023, 100 g extended the anabolic response beyond 12 hours, compared to 25 g. In 37 men of approximately 71 years, 40 g of whey isolate stimulated muscle synthesis more after exercise than 20 g.
In the 2014 trial, 20 g of whey isolate was sufficient; a dose of 30 g of our 100% Whey Isolate provides 22.9 g of protein. Our guide for building muscle details the calculation of daily intake based on body weight.
Leucine, within a complete protein. The same scientific society recommends targeting 700 to 3,000 mg of leucine per serving, within a protein providing all essential amino acids. This last point matters: in 24 men, 6.25 g of leucine-enriched whey stimulated muscle synthesis as much as 25 g of whey in the first 3 hours, but only the 25 g maintained it elevated from 3 to 5 hours after exercise, at 184% above fasting versus 55%. In women aged 65 to 75, two daily servings of 15 g of protein enriched with 4.2 g of leucine stimulated muscle synthesis more than servings providing 1.3 g; this trial, co-signed by a food company, did not use native whey.
For a 70 kg person, 1.6 g per kilogram represents approximately 112 g of protein per day, for example four meals or snacks of 25 to 30 g. In seniors, one trial argues for more generous servings, around 40 g after exercise. Our article on sarcopenia after 50 explores this point further.
Building muscle: what complements protein
After progressive training and protein intake, creatine monohydrate is the supplement with the most comprehensive evidence base; a sports nutrition scientific society deems it safe in healthy individuals, up to 30 g per day for 5 years in studies.
When combined with resistance training for at least 6 weeks, creatine increased muscle thickness measured by imaging, in both upper and lower body, by 0.10 to 0.16 cm more than placebo. The authors describe a very small effect, with an overall effect size of 0.11, below the 0.2 threshold that conventionally defines a small effect, slightly more pronounced in young adults than in older adults.
Burke R, Piñero A, Coleman M, et al. Nutrients 2023;15(9):2116. DOI: 10.3390/nu15092116
The dose doesn't need to be high. In 31 men, 20 g per day for 6 days increased muscle creatine by approximately 20%, and 3 g per day for 28 days resulted in a similar increase, just more slowly. Our Creatine Creapure provides 3 g of creatine monohydrate per 3 capsules, the dose studied in this trial, and our creatine monohydrate powder is used at 5 g per day.
Creatine is not recommended for children, adolescents, or pregnant or nursing women. During supplementation, maintain adequate hydration. If you have kidney disease or are on long-term medication, consult your doctor before starting.
Digestion and lactose: isolate or concentrate
Lactose may bother people who digest it poorly, but a systematic review of 36 randomized trials is reassuring: most adults who report intolerance or lactose malabsorption tolerate 12 to 15 g of lactose, or about one cup of milk. The same review found insufficient evidence that a product with 0 to 2 g of lactose reduces symptoms more than a higher-lactose product.
By design, the richer a powder is in protein, the less room there is for lactose; a review demonstrated this for milk protein concentrates, and the same principle applies to whey: an isolate generally contains less than a concentrate. Our Whey 100% Isolate contains 1.8 g of carbohydrates, of which 1.3 g are sugars, per 30 g. Native origin doesn't resolve the issue: native whey concentrate also contains lactose. The Norwegian trials actually excluded people intolerant to lactose or allergic to milk, so they don't provide information on tolerance.
Usage advice, not trial results: prepare the dose in cold water rather than milk, start with half a dose for a few days, and consult if symptoms persist with an isolate.
Lactose intolerance is digestive discomfort related to milk sugar. Milk protein allergy is an immune system reaction to the proteins themselves, and all whey, native, standard, concentrate, or isolate, contains them. If you have a known or suspected allergy, or experience a skin, respiratory, or digestive reaction after taking it, stop the whey and seek medical advice.
Common misconceptions and comparison table
"Native whey is more anabolic." It raises blood leucine higher, that's established. But compared to standard whey, it didn't increase muscle synthesis more in young or older adults, and it produced gains in mass and strength comparable to milk, with no significant difference, over 11 to 12 weeks.
"Cheese whey is waste." Whey is a co-product of cheese production that the industry seeks to valorize, particularly in its acid form. When concentrated, cheese whey is nonetheless the most used protein in supplements, often considered by researchers as the reference standard. In a small short-term trial, a whey hydrolysate stimulated muscle synthesis more than casein or soy, and cheese whey did so with no significant difference from native whey.
"More leucine necessarily means more muscle." Leucine triggers muscle synthesis, but a complete protein is necessary to prolong it, and synthesis measured over a few hours doesn't predict muscle gain over several months. The few tenths of a gram difference between native and standard didn't make a measurable difference.
"Undenatured, it's better absorbed." In the laboratory, an isolate denatured by heat released its amino acids at the same rate as a native isolate; this study compared degrees of denaturation, not whey from milk or cheese sources.
Our article on the whey and its effects according to studies reviews other common misconceptions.
| Criterion | What studies show | Level of evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Leucine content | Approximately 15% higher with native, due to lack of glycomacropeptide | Solid: composition measured in multiple trials |
| Blood leucine | Higher peak and area under the curve with native | Good: two randomized trials, young and senior adults |
| Muscle synthesis over 5 hours | No significant difference with standard whey | Moderate: two small trials with biopsies |
| Mass and strength over 11 to 12 weeks | Gains comparable to milk, with no significant difference; no long-term trial against standard whey in resistance training | Moderate for milk comparison, absent versus standard whey |
| Recovery | Favorable signals in two small trials with specific protocols | Weak: trials funded or co-signed by the dairy industry |
| Taste and fat content | Less fat with native, without measured better taste | One composition and tasting study |
| Digestion and lactose | Depends mainly on the degree of purification, isolate or concentrate | Indirect: no tolerance trial of native versus standard |
Reading a label and using your whey properly
A whey protein isolate manufactured in France, obtained by filtration, which provides 22.9 g of protein and 117 kcal per 30 g serving. Vanilla or chocolate, without aspartame or artificial colors: one serving in the morning and one after training on workout days, morning and evening on rest days.
View the whey isolateOur article on whey, its effects according to studies and its myths complements this comparison.
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between native whey and standard whey?
Native whey is extracted directly from skim milk by microfiltration, before any cheese manufacturing. Standard whey comes from whey recovered after cheese curdling. Without glycomacropeptide, native whey contains approximately 15% more leucine.
Is native whey better for building muscle?
Studies don't show this. Compared to standard whey, it did not increase muscle protein synthesis more over 5 hours, in young people as well as those over 70 years old. It produced gains in mass and strength comparable to those of milk, with no significant difference, after 11 to 12 weeks of training.
Native whey or standard whey: which to choose?
Both are very high-quality proteins; choose based on protein content, lactose tolerance, taste, ingredients, and price per serving of protein. The daily intake, around 1.6 g per kilogram, and the dose per serving, 20 to 40 g, matter more than the source.
Why does native whey contain more leucine?
Because it does not contain glycomacropeptide. This casein fragment, released by rennet during cheese manufacturing, represents 20 to 25% of the proteins in sweet whey products and is naturally low in leucine.
What is native whey worth according to scientific opinions?
It raises blood leucine higher, but studies with biopsies and those lasting several weeks do not show an advantage for muscle. The few favorable results on recovery come from small studies funded or co-signed by the dairy industry.
Does a native whey isolate exist?
Yes. The term native describes the origin of whey, extracted from milk without going through the cheese factory, and not its protein content. A native whey can be a concentrate or an isolate, just like standard whey.
Is whey from cheese-making of lower quality?
No. Whey concentrate from cheese is the most used protein in supplements and is often considered the reference by researchers. In a small short-term study, a whey hydrolysate stimulated muscle synthesis more than casein or soy, and whey from cheese-making did so with no significant difference from native.
Is native whey more digestible?
No study has compared the digestive tolerance of the two wheys. Digestive comfort depends mainly on the degree of purification: by construction, an isolate, richer in protein, generally leaves less room for lactose than a concentrate, whether the whey is native or standard. Most lactose-sensitive adults tolerate 12 to 15 g of lactose.
Whey isolate or concentrate: what's the difference?
The isolate is more purified than the concentrate; the most common in supplements, called WPC-80, contains approximately 80% protein. By construction, the higher the protein content, the less room remains for lactose. Both a concentrate and an isolate can be of native or cheese-making origin.
How much whey to take per day?
It depends on your diet. Studies place the total useful intake around 1.6 g of protein per kilogram per day, and servings of 20 to 40 g. Whey is mainly used to supplement meals.
Sources
The studies cited below were identified via PubMed.
- Hamarsland H, Nordengen AL, Nyvik Aas S, et al. Native whey rich in leucine induces similar muscle anabolic responses after exercise as conventional whey: a randomized controlled trial. J Int Soc Sports Nutr, 2017;14:43. DOI
- Daly A, Pinto A, Evans S, MacDonald A. Is glycomacropeptide living up to its potential in phenylketonuria? Nutrients, 2022;14(4):807. DOI
- Hamarsland H, Johansen MK, Seeberg F, et al. Native whey induces similar strength training adaptations as milk despite higher leucine in older adults. Nutrients, 2019;11(9):2094. DOI
- Hamarsland H, Aas SN, Nordengen AL, et al. Native whey induces similar muscle anabolic responses after exercise as conventional whey despite higher plasma leucine in older adults. The Journal of Nutrition, Health and Aging, 2019;23(1):42-50. DOI
- Hamarsland H, Handegard V, Kåshagen M, et al. No difference between dried milk and native whey supplementation combined with strength training. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 2019;51(1):75-83. DOI
- Garcia-Vicencio S, Ratel S, Gryson C, et al. Moderate native whey supplementation promotes better training adaptations and recovery than standard whey: a 12-week electrostimulation and plyometric study. Frontiers in Physiology, 2018;9:1312. DOI
- Morton RW, Murphy KT, McKellar SR, et al. Systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression of the effect of protein supplementation on muscle mass and strength gains induced by resistance training in healthy adults. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 2018;52(6):376-384. DOI
- Jäger R, Kerksick CM, Campbell BI, et al. Position stand of a sports nutrition scientific society: protein and exercise. J Int Soc Sports Nutr, 2017;14:20. DOI
- Rocha-Mendoza D, Kosmerl E, Krentz A, et al. Invited review: trends and health benefits of acid whey. Journal of Dairy Science, 2021;104(2):1262-1275. DOI
- Carter BG, Cheng N, Kapoor R, et al. Invited review: caseins and whey proteins obtained from milk by microfiltration. Journal of Dairy Science, 2021;104(3):2465-2479. DOI
- Etzel MR. Fabrication and utilization of milk protein fractions. The Journal of Nutrition, 2004;134(4):996S-1002S. DOI
- Agarwal S, Beausire RLW, Patel S, Patel H. Innovative uses of milk protein concentrates in product development. Journal of Food Science, 2015;80(Suppl 1):A23-A29. DOI
- Tang JE, Moore DR, Kujbida GW, et al. Ingestion of whey hydrolysate, casein, or soy protein isolate: effects on muscle protein synthesis at rest and after resistance exercise in young men. Journal of Applied Physiology, 2009;107(3):987-992. DOI
- Evans J, Zulewska J, Newbold M, et al. Comparison of the composition and sensory properties of 80% whey protein concentrates and milk serum proteins. Journal of Dairy Science, 2010;93(5):1824-1843. DOI
- Abrahamse E, Thomassen GGM, Renes IB, et al. Evaluation of milk protein digestion kinetics: effects of heat denaturation and protein type. Food and Function, 2022;13(10):5715-5729. DOI
- Kim J, Jeong EW, Baek Y, et al. Comparison of the effects of commercial whey and native whey on muscle strength and protein synthesis in rats. Food Science and Biotechnology, 2023;32(3):381-388. DOI
- Traylor DA, Gorissen SHM, Hopper H, et al. Plasma amino acid concentrations after ingestion of native whey, micellar casein, and a whey-casein blend in young men. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism, 2019;44(1):103-106. DOI
- Bischof K, Kripp AM, Petropoulou M, et al. Effect of different protein sources on acute muscle protein synthesis after resistance training: systematic review with standard and dose-response network meta-analyses. J Int Soc Sports Nutr, 2026;23(1):2740224. DOI
- Mitchell CJ, Churchward-Venne TA, Parise G, et al. Acute myofibrillar protein synthesis after exercise is not correlated with resistance training-induced hypertrophy in young men. PLoS One, 2014;9(2):e89431. DOI
- Lander E, Hamarsland H, Lees MJ, et al. Resistance training partially corrects age-related differences in muscle amino acid transporters: secondary analysis of two randomized controlled trials. The Journal of Nutrition, Health and Aging, 2026;30(4):100808. DOI
- Fabre M, Mathieu B, Tiollier E, et al. Effects of a native whey beverage and carbohydrates on physical performance and plasma markers of muscle damage and inflammation during a simulated seven-a-side rugby tournament: a randomized double-blind crossover placebo-controlled trial. Nutrients, 2022;14(22):4780. DOI
- Witard OC, Jackman SR, Breen L, et al. Myofibrillar protein synthesis rates in response to increasing doses of whey protein at rest and after resistance exercise. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2014;99(1):86-95. DOI
- Moore DR, Robinson MJ, Fry JL, et al. Ingested protein dose response of muscle and albumin protein synthesis after resistance exercise in young men. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2009;89(1):161-168. DOI
- Macnaughton LS, Wardle SL, Witard OC, et al. The response of muscle protein synthesis following whole-body resistance exercise is greater after 40 g than 20 g of whey protein. Physiological Reports, 2016;4(15):e12893. DOI
- Trommelen J, van Lieshout GAA, Nyakayiru J, et al. The anabolic response to protein ingestion during recovery from exercise has no upper limit in magnitude or duration in humans. Cell Reports Medicine, 2023;4(12):101324. DOI
- Yang Y, Breen L, Burd NA, et al. Resistance exercise increases myofibrillar protein synthesis with an increasing dose of whey protein in older men. The British Journal of Nutrition, 2012;108(10):1780-1788. DOI
- Churchward-Venne TA, Burd NA, Mitchell CJ, et al. Supplementation of a suboptimal protein dose with leucine or essential amino acids: effects on myofibrillar protein synthesis at rest and following resistance exercise in men. The Journal of Physiology, 2012;590(11):2751-2765. DOI
- Devries MC, McGlory C, Bolster DR, et al. Protein leucine content determines the short- and longer-term muscle protein synthetic response to meal feeding in healthy older women: a randomized controlled trial. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2018;107(2):217-226. DOI
- Kreider RB, Kalman DS, Antonio J, et al. International Society of Sports Nutrition position stand: safety and efficacy of creatine supplementation in exercise, sport, and medicine. J Int Soc Sports Nutr, 2017;14:18. DOI
- Burke R, Piñero A, Coleman M, et al. Effects of creatine combined with resistance training on regional measures of muscle hypertrophy: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Nutrients, 2023;15(9):2116. DOI
- Hultman E, Söderlund K, Timmons JA, et al. Muscle creatine loading in humans. Journal of Applied Physiology, 1996;81(1):232-237. DOI
- Shaukat A, Levitt MD, Taylor BC, et al. Systematic review: effective strategies for managing lactose intolerance. Annals of Internal Medicine, 2010;152(12):797-803. DOI
